- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 28,912
- Reactions
- 26,720
He was protecting his family. They could have shot his Mum or Dad. You know how trigger happy they are.Well I guess we may as well play out the Kirk issue out to the end, if most think it is related to the thread.
Here is another twist, the left wing assasin apparently gave himself up, because he didn't want to be shot by police.
Now there's a do unto others as you would have done unto you, contradiction.
He didn't like what the Kirk had to say, so it justified shooting and killing him, but he didn't like the idea of being shot himself, because it might hurt or worse.
Alleged Kirk killer surrendered in fear of being shot by police, sheriff says
Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing political activist Charlie Kirk, only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, a sheriff involved with his arrest says.www.abc.net.au
Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused of killing right-wing activist Charlie Kirk in a politically charged shooting, was afraid of being shot by police and eventually only agreed to surrender if it was done peacefully, according to a sheriff involved with taking him into custody.
Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?He was protecting his family. They could have shot his Mum or Dad. You know how trigger happy they are.
Obviously they gave him a chance to give up.Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?
He put his family under threat by going home, it wasn't as though he just happened upon the Kirk lecture by chance. Lol
He planned the whole episode, now all of a sudden he was being a considerate person, didn't Kirk have a family?
The order came from the FCC, no doubt because of direct pressure from the Trump Administration, not even Disney can over ride the FCC.
But it’s weird I thought Trump and MAGA were all about Freedom of speech. Turns out as usual they don’t want Freedom of speech, they want privilege for them selves to say what they like, but not anyone else.
Double standards here.
I've mentioned before on these pages the thesis of The Fourth Turning. It seems to be playing out as expected.I don't know who Tucker Wilson or Jimmy Kimmel, but those comments and the way he tries to hide them behind humour is despicable and disgusting. No wonder his boss 'parted ways" with him. probably the same for Wilson, but I don't follow US current affairs programs to know. What I do know is that those kinds of remarks are a form of belittling and bullying, and by making it common through media and daily life it degrades humanity and causes rifts in society that leads to anger and violence. Exactly what we are seeing play out.
No, because he was hoping to get away with it, and at first he believed he had. Apparently he only gave himself up when he knew he had been identified, his Grandad recognised the rifle when it was shown on TV, and other family recognised his image.Couldn't he have just got off the foof and walked over to the neatest police, or police station?
Usually when a person who was inspirational public speaker dies, we get over whelmed with montages on social media of all the inspirational quotes and speeches they made.My quote was:
It certainly seems that many feel that actual assasination is ok, as long as it is accompanied with a character assasination.
Well actually you prove the point, you say that you haven't heard MANY PEOPLE express those feelings. So you have heard some.
Then you give him a character assasination.
Which could well be perceived as meaning you are very likely to be one of those you mention, that express those ferlings
So I don't know why you are pontificating, by trying to correct everyone.
When your obvious dislike of the person condones homicidal behaviour toward them.
What are your feelings on capital punishment? Would you say it's ok as long as the person can be shown as right wing.
It's certainly an interesting time in history, where the victim who is shot while going about his lawfull business, comes under more scrutiny for their behaviour, than the criminal that shot the person and you are attacking anyone that is saying it was a disgracefull act.
Interesting.
ASF is the only social media I'm on, so luckily I avoid most of the loonie self indulgent vitriol.Usually when a person who was inspirational public speaker dies, we get over whelmed with montages on social media of all the inspirational quotes and speeches they made.
So far I haven’t noticed any of these going around yet, I wonder why?
I mean there are plenty of Montages on him saying crap things, and his supporters are just saying he is being taken out of context, but why are the supporters putting together reels of all his best quotes they love?
It's fascinating how in the same take - he covers Trump making billions (Via the ABC question)....then promotes a book about how Trump squandered his fathers fortune. Elon musk (supposedly) was down to nothing at the early stages of Tesla and nearing bankruptcy. Thats just part of being an entrepreneur and businessman.given the consequences probably worth a full take;
Well I have never said Kirk didn’t have the right to voice his opinion, or that he deserved to die… all I have said was that he wasn’t a great person, and shouldn’t be made out to be a hero, he was actively fighting against all the positive changes that have happened, and wanted to return to the bad old days.ASF is the only social media I'm on, so luckily I avoid most of the loonie self indulgent vitriol.
If you will notice, I haven't said anything about the content of Kirks speaches, or about his character, only generalisations about the incident.
With regard the incident, there was only one criminal, the victim whether liked or disliked has a right to voice his opinion, same as those who dissagree with him, it is strong opinions that bring about change like marriage equality, stopping the Vietnam war etc.
Society has a problem when only one side has a stage and the other side is demonised, which is happening currently and driving social unrest in the West.
Only my opinion and I'm sure you will disagree, as is your want and your right.
That's your opinion, which you have every right to and hopefully you don't have a loonie harm you for it.Well I have never said Kirk didn’t have the right to voice his opinion, or that he deserved to die… all I have said was that he wasn’t a great person, and shouldn’t be made out to be a hero, he was actively fighting against all the positive changes that have happened, and wanted to return to the bad old days.
Kimmel blatantly lied about the motivation of the shooter. Nobody removed Kimmel's 1A rights, but nobody ever says free speech is not exempt from consequences, especially the left.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?